Related Posts
Hi Guys
Anyone from Deloitte engagement advisory division?
If someone is taking 11 lacs at senior consultant level how much increment normally they can expect in engagement advisory Deloitte usi?
Basically what are normal increments in engagement advisory (FP&A) IN DELOITTE USIDeloitte USI Deloitte
If there is anything science taught you it is-
Additional Posts in Finance
Is Tom Cruise gay?
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
There are loopholes in the welfare system that are completely legal too. I'm not talking about illegal gaming of welfare - just like I'm not saying taking that loss was illegal.
Except one is legal tax avoidance and the other is illegal fraud...
I see. Need to close the loopholes as much as possible for both I suppose
Well, by law, it does.
Except one is gaming the system to keep more of the money you earned and the other is gaming the system to take more money for doing nothing
So yeah, I guess my argument is predicated on the assumption that real, actual laws are real, actual laws
Expect both have the same effect - less tax basis for the US government. In one scenario fewer dollars go in. In the other scenario more dollars go out. The end effect is the same and the societal burden is the same.
No, the system is taking money out of the tax payer. The welfare recipient/scammer is taking money out of the system. Sounds like you're assuming that the government has claim to your income before you do.
Why does my company have so many utopian idealogues, sorry people
I am not applauding him!
But at least he worked at beating the system. And by worked I mean he hired people to do it, so that was good for their business. Those who Cheat welfare have no work ethic. Cheating welfare isn't hard to do. Cheating on your taxes takes a crap load of lawyers who can figure out the loop holes.
Lol @JPM1 I don't fault him at all actually, I'm an ideologue but more of the Ayn Rand variety. People seek to maximize their welfare. Totally rational. I just hate hypocrisy and thought I'd point some out.
For @Brown, I'm not sure how the ease of the deed changes the wrongness or rightness. You didn't really connect the dots there.
Impairment ?
Common tax avoidance technique is to impair a bunch of assets in one year all together to realize a big loss. Carry loss two years back and twenty years forward (used to be three and fifteen)
What's the point of an all-in-one-year loss if you're going to carry the loss forward ?
Do u have a citation for "impairment"?
@OP so if you get a $50k raise and you get robbed for $50k you're totally cool with it? No worse off than last year, right?
Actually a decent argument @barclays, but unfortunately this is a case of two people being the robbers in the equation. My argument isn't that if there is no net change that the events are equivalent - it's that if you're both taking money out of the system, just in different ways, you're comparable and that the end effect of those actions is equivalent.
@Brown, difficulty doesn't matter and it's harder to do the latter. There aren't accountants for welfare. And people shouldn't be praising him for evading taxes when he paid someone to do it - if I pay some to fix my car doesn't mean I'm a good mechanic or driver